CTPenland Line
Penland's Public Art Session
Robin Drcj er
The third session of Penland’s 1999 summer program was devoted to
classes covering various aspects of public art. The idea was to explore
and reinforce the connections between craft and public art, and to pro
vide craft artists with specific skills needed to move from the studio
into the public realm. This account oj the session was provided by
Regina Flanagan, who is the
former director of the
Minnesota Percent for Art in
Public Places Program.
In the darkness ahead,
the buildings of Penland
shimmer through the
trees as 1 round the last
curve near the top of the
mountain. The studios are
still brilliantly illuminated
at this late hour. Visible
within a grove is the out
line of a mysterious, red
Several in the group indicated socially-driven agendas for
their work. One commented that public art is a way to loosen
up and allow others to work with you, as well as feed you, so
you do not stagnate. Another voiced dissatisfaction with the
traditional art world; places like museums and galleries made
no sense for her work.
The discussion came to a head when a
young artist asked why so much public art
seems to be of poor quality, and panders
to the lowest common denominator. The
instructors, who have a range of experi
ence creating work for public settings,
offered their insights. Elizabeth Busch
explained that the arti.sts and the commu
nity members who serve on committees
choosing the art may have different ideas
about what is right.They have to he able to
make choices on their own about what is
appropriate. Judy Byron concurred, noting
Regina Flanagan, instructor Angelica Pozo, and several class members
listen while student Reggie Pointer explains bis proposalfor a site at
neon-lighted cube. The the International Center for Water Resources in Ohio. Angelica’s class that we may he expert about art, hut how
1 -^1 worked from the same materials that were furnished to artists cntcrina i i i i
.scene hums with activity. , « could we be expert about
the competition for this site.
community
Rohm Drc\
I had been away from
the campus for the first time since arriving ten days before to
serve on the faculty of a two-week session on public art. In
addition to visiting studios and providing critiques of design
ideas and propo.sals, I was invited to open the se.ssion with a
talk aimed at forming a conceptual framework for public art.
In the audience were arti.sts inquiring about public art, practi
tioners and art administrators, design professionals, and inter
ested lay people.
Contemporary urbani.st Richard Sennett, in his 1990 book
The Conscience of the Eye: The Design and Social Life of Cities,
observed that the creators of public spaces cannot design
something significant by creating immediate fullne.ss.The most
successful public places,
he says, are those simple
and flexible enough to
permit alteration. By
human improvisation and
use, spaces develop a nar
rative quality—with
memories and stories
attached to them—that
gives them character.
Usina this as a frame-
O
work, 1 presented a series
of public projects, focus
ing on the physical object
and then shifting to the
social function of space
which must be under.stood as a place of .social relations, rather
than an empty, neutral vessel to be filled. We examined public
art that creates flexible space with permeable borders, embod
ies narrative power that enables personal .stories to evolve, and
celebrates the touch of the human hand.
1 also served as moderator for a series of .salons on practical
and theoretical topics. At the first salon, we talked about why
an artist becomes involved in public art. Penland Director jean
McLaughlin, who previously administered North Carolina’s
Art in Public Places program, remarked that public art affords
the opportunity to think conceptually about how people can
touch others in the world.
A detail of the awning installation created by Ralph Helmick and Stu
Schechter’s students. Each student in the class made a pair of finials
f°^ the pipes that supported the canvas awnings.
could we he expert at
members’ lives?
A murmur went through the crowd when sculptor Ralph
Helmick said that public art seems to have two divergent agen
das: social work and aesthetic excellence. David Dunlap dis
agreed with reducing public art to these fixed categories;
social work may redefine aesthetic excellence, he a.ssertcd.
At the next salon, Judy Byron remarked that public art has
not had an idiosyncratic voice; it needs to be redefined and
reconstructed to achieve a “facetednes.s” that is more dimen
sional and reflective of the diversity of people and viewpoints.
Elizabeth Conner noted that artists may become obsessively
client-driven, as occasionally happens with design profession
als. We must remind ourselves why we were hired, she said.
When someone says they want a specific
thing, this should not be the end of the
conversation.
.Student Kendra Brock perceived a
hierarchy and a separation between the
creators of large objects and artists who
arc involved in community-based art.
Ralph Helmick wondered if it is even pos
sible to talk about the issue of quality in
art? “We are going to involve the commu
nity” has become such a catch-phrase—we
need to ask harder questions of the work,
he contended.
The intelligence and thoughtfulness of
these discussions was also evident in the
projects created by the .studios during the
two-week session. Numerous ephemeral in.stallations as well as
several permanent additions transformed the campus. The stu
dio directed by Ralph Helmick and Stu Schechtcr created a
scries of four canvas canopies for an arbor next to the dining
hall. The students agreed they would “rather fail at a challeng
ing site than succeed at an easy one,” so instead of choosing a
site of innate beauty, they focused on making a net improve
ment to the campus. First, they asse.ssed the present function
of the site, taking into account what people wanted, then they
built a study model to test their ideas. Finally, they ordered
canvas, and sewed and assembled the canopies.
Dana Moore
Carlos Alves’s ceramic students designed and fabricated a
resplendent twenty-foot long ceramic mosaic mural on a
retaining wall opposite one of Penland’s flower beds. Ceramic
tile signs were created by Angelica Pozo’s class. Fiber artist
Ellen Kochansky’s group produced a communal quilt/sculp
ture featuring mementos wrapped and bound to its surface.
Elizabeth Conner’s studio took on an ambitious project to
determine a use for a prominently sited but condemned ser
vice station in the nearby town of Spruce Pine. The stone
building appears to emerge from the rocky cliff face behind it,
but boulders have broken away from the bank and rest directly
against the building. People are not allowed inside, so the
group could only work with the building’s handsome facade
and the space in front of it.
The students researched local history, interviewed town
officials and community members, and examined planning and
site issues relative to downtown development. They propo.scd a
gathering place ori
ented to local people
as well as visitors.
They decided that a
series of windows
could replace the ser
vice station’s garage
doors, and visible
inside the building
would be exhibits that
honor historical
events, including the
mining industry, as
well as provide infor
mation on local envi
ronmental concerns.
The group pho
tographed the build
ing and its environs;
constructed a detailed
model and drew
scaled plans for the
plaza; produced pro
totypes of the exhibit
elements showing imagery and content; and formally present
ed their propo.sal - all within two-weeks!
While many .studios grappled with the dynamics of group
proce.ss and decision making to produce one outcome shared
by many, other classes worked through the creative process of
preparing individual design proposals. Both Angelica Pozo’s
and Elizabeth Busch s students developed proposals responding
to prospectuses and plans for actual buildings, while Judy
Byron’s drawing students created temporary site-specific
in.stallations located throughout the nearby town of Burnsville.
Of all the work produced during the public art se.ssion, the
red neon-lighted cube glowing in the pine grove on the hillside
that summer night came to symbolize its spirit to me.
Resulting from a spontaneous collaboration between Sally
Prasch in the glass studio and movement instructor Kristine
Lindahl, the eight-foot-square, open-sided cube was used for a
dance improvi.sation one evening. It remained on the hillside
for several days, illuminated through the night to greet us in
the humid, foggy dawn; an imaginary vessel holding our cumu
lative energy within its physical space. —Regina Flanagan
This is a temporary installation by students in
Dan Engelke's class on environmental
sculpture. The stalks were made of local plant
materials and paper; the lights were powered
by hidden battery packs.